North Carolina Association of Educators, Inc. v. State
North Carolina Supreme Court
786 S.E.2d 255 (2016)
- Written by Ann Wooster, JD
Facts
The career-status law enacted by the State of North Carolina (defendant) created a tenure system for the employment of public-school teachers. Teachers earned career status after a successful probationary period and a favorable vote from the school board. The career-status law was repealed by the Current Operations and Capital Improvements Appropriations Act of 2013, which retroactively revoked the earned-career status of public-school teachers. The stated goal of the new act was to maintain the quality of public-school teachers by making it easier for the school districts to dismiss low-performing teachers. The North Carolina Association of Educators, five public-school teachers with earned-career status, and a probationary teacher (plaintiffs) filed a complaint in the trial court and argued that repeal of the career-status law violated the Contract Clause of the United States Constitution. The trial court declared the new act unconstitutional only as it applied to the teachers with earned-career status. The trial court granted a preliminary injunction to the teachers with earned-career status to prevent the state from enforcing the new act. All parties appealed the matter. The appeals court affirmed the trial court’s ruling that repeal of the career-status law violated the Contract Clause as to teachers with earned-career status. The state appealed this decision.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Edmunds, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 821,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 989 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.